4.  The applicant was born in 1963 and lives in İzmir.
5.  The applicant was a member of the executive board of the İzmir Branch of the Human Rights Association (“the Association”) at the time of lodging his application to the Court.
6.  On 10 July 2001 the İzmir Governor sent a letter to the Association requesting that the membership of thirteen persons be annulled as they were considered to be involved in illegal activities.
7.  On 6 August 2001 the Association replied to the Governor, maintaining that they would not execute the request since none of these thirteen persons had convictions which would ban them from founding or becoming a member of an association, as provided by Article 4 §§ 2 and 3 of the Law on Associations (Law No. 2908).
8.  On 8 August 2001 the İzmir Public Prosecutor took the applicant's statement and informed him that a prosecution had been initiated against him for non-compliance with Article 4 of Law No. 2908 and that no court proceedings would be initiated if he paid a fine of 142,366,000 Turkish liras (TRL)[1] within ten days. The applicant did not pay the fine within ten days as required by the payment order.
9.  Subsequently, on 3 December 2001 the İzmir public prosecutor filed a bill of indictment against the applicant and the other members of the executive board of the İzmir Branch of the Human Rights Association. The public prosecutor requested that the accused be sentenced to a fine under Article 75 of the Law on Associations and Article 119 of the Criminal Code for their failure to comply with the İzmir Governor's request. The bill of indictment was not notified to the applicant.
10.  On 26 December 2001 the İzmir Magistrates' Court, without holding a hearing, found the applicant and other co-accused guilty as charged and, by a penal order (ceza kararnamesi), sentenced them to a fine of TRL 213,548,400[2] per person. In doing so, the court relied on the “simplified procedure” stipulated in Article 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for relatively minor offences.
11.  The applicant and the other co-accused filed an objection with the İzmir Criminal Court against the decision of 26 December 2001.
12.  On 6 February 2002 the İzmir Criminal Court dismissed the objection, without holding a hearing.
13.  On 13 February 2002 a payment order was issued in respect of the applicant. The applicant paid the due amount in three instalments on 12 March, 9 April and 9 May 2002 respectively.
14.  Subsequently, on 16 December 2002 one of the co-accused, Mr N.B., applied to the Ministry of Justice, requesting the Minister to refer the case to the Court of Cassation by way of a written order (yazılı emir).
15.  On 29 January 2003 the Minister of Justice issued a written order and instructed the Chief Public Prosecutor at the Court of Cassation to ask the Court of Cassation to set aside the judgment concerned.
16.  On 14 April 2003 the Court of Cassation quashed the judgment of the İzmir Criminal Court dated 6 February 2002 and the case file was remitted to the İzmir Magistrate's Court.
17.  On 14 May 2003 the İzmir Magistrates' Court held a preparatory hearing and included the case in its list. It further decided to summon all of the defendants, including the applicant, to its next hearing.
18.  On 14 July, 7 August and 22 October 2003 respectively, the court held three hearings. The applicant did not attend any of them.
19.  At its last hearing held on 22 October 2003, the Magistrates' Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the case because, following the promulgation of Law No. 4854 on 24 April 2003, the sentence imposed on the applicant for not complying with the İzmir Governorship's order had been classified as an administrative fine. During the proceedings, none of the defendants made submissions to the court.
20.  On 20 November 2003 some of the defendants, but not the applicant, appealed against this decision.
21.  On 25 February 2004 the Court of Cassation upheld the decision of the İzmir Criminal Court. The case file was sent to the Governorship of İzmir.